Look, Listen & Learn

Watch this video, which has been released on the CaseyAnthonyisinnocent.com Website. Judge for yourself and feel free to express your thoughts here, in comments.

To me, it looks like she’s sitting in an office somewhere. Also, she says this is the first of many videos, but trust me, I won’t be posting them unless you express otherwise.

Quiet Observations, FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!

“There is no reason for a 2-year-old child to decompose in a field in a plastic bag with duct tape over its face.”

“I don’t understand people who think Elvis is still alive. I don’t understand people who think we never landed on the moon. I don’t get those people. So I don’t get these people [the jury] either.”

— Dr. Jan Garavaglia, on Sunday night’s program on TLC, The Learning Channel

Yes, I watched it, and yes, it was exceptionally well done, but did I learn anything new? Not much, really. It served to reiterate and fortify the state of Florida’s substantive and well grounded claims made against the mother of Caylee Marie Anthony, charged with her murder and found not guilty by a jury of her peers. I think, mostly, it allowed Dr. G to get some things off her chest. In the end, Caylee’s death was a homicide, regardless of the end result, and it tore at the very fabric of the Orange-Osceola chief medical examiner. This is a case that will forever haunt everyone involved, especially law enforcement, investigators on all levels, and prosecutors, who spent countless hours going to bat for Caylee. Yes, us, too.

God knows we’ve had countless what ifs to ponder; things that never made it into the courtroom and ones that did that didn’t pan out, like the phone call between Erica Gonzalez and the defendant on July 15, 2008, when Casey (I broke my own rule) was on her way to pick up Amy Huizenga at the airport. Gonzalez claimed she heard Caylee being scolded by her mother during that call, but that was impossible because, in his opening statement, Jose Baez said that Caylee was dead on June 16, 2008, a full month earlier.

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Why wasn’t that phone call used to it’s fullest advantage at trial? Yes, Gonzalez was questioned on the stand by Assistant State Attorney Frank George, but she couldn’t remember the details at the time. OK, fine, but at that point, she should have been shown the document above to help remind her of what she told law enforcement. She wasn’t. Anyway, that was a key piece of evidence in my opinion, that went nowhere. As a matter of fact, it worked to the defense’s advantage. Why? Surely, a “grieving” mother would have no reason to make up a silly lie about scolding her dead child, right? What would be the point? Why talk to an imaginary person, something she did very well? The state should have expanded on it. (Watch Erica Gonzalez’s testimony here)

Sadly, there are no more points to make because it’s way too late for that. Case closed. I just needed to get that off my chest.

Of course, it’s never too late to remind everyone that, although the case may be closed, the memories are permanently etched in the minds of all of us who lived through it, and history will look as kindly on Casey Anthony as it has on Lizzie Borden, scorned to this day, yet dating all the way back to the 1890s. You know, the nursery rhyme about the 40 whacks she gave her mother that’s still recited. And like the one for Lizzie, I wrote one for you know who over a year ago - 6 months before the trial began, when no one knew the outcome would be similar to Lizzie’s…

THE BALLAD OF CASEY

For the rest of her life

Her name will be mud

For taking the life

Of her own flesh and blood.

For what lies ahead

Is a brewing storm.

Her Caylee long dead

Was fed chloroform.

I did change a few words from my original, but I hope it lasts a hundred years or more. Oh no, not because of me. I don’t care if anyone remembers who wrote it, I just want people to remember Caylee. Whether her mother murdered her or not, she was solely responsible for her death.

Moving on, we come to one of the prosecutors from the Anthony trial, Jeff Ashton, now retired. Today, he’s a best selling author and there are some misconceptions about him making the rounds on the Internet. I’m going to do my best to give you the truth. For sure, Ashton must have been working on his book during the trial, right? Perhaps, before it began, you think? I mean, how else could anyone explain how it was written and published in what seemed like record time? It was roughly 5 months after the trial ended that Imperfect Justice was on bookshelves across America. What gives? According to Suzanne Fox of VeroNews.com, the book wasn’t crafted until after the trial ended, and according to Ashton, not before he took his wife and children on a much needed vacation.

“When we started, I had no frame of reference,” Ashton said. “I figured the timeframe was short, but I didn’t really understand how short until the lawyer who vetted the book for HarperCollins told me that we’d done in three months what usually takes eighteen.”

“I couldn’t have taken on the book project if I was still working,” he added. “Even if the State Attorney would have authorized me to do it, there wouldn’t have been time.”

Of course, having Lisa Pulitzer, a seasoned professional crime writer on hand, helped tremendously. So did a very serious-minded editor, something I learned about while writing for Mike Boslet, Editor-in-Chief of Orlando magazine, during the trial. Get the job done.

That leads me to Ashton’s latest announcement that he’s going to challenge his former boss, Lawson Lamar, for the office of Orange-Osceola State Attorney. Alas, I would strongly consider voting for him except for one thing. I live in Seminole County, home of the 18th District Court. He’s in the 9th, and I can’t vote there. However, I can still offer my thoughts regarding his background and qualifications.

The Super Bowl comes once a year. Half of us don’t remember who won last year when the new one comes around. But after the big event, we look at the losing team as a bunch of, well, losers, not taking into account that they came in second in a field of 32 teams. Out of those teams, Number 2 stands out like a sore thumb. Why? In real life, Number 2 is not a pathetic loser. Yes, the Super Bowl is all about hype leading up to the main event and the media sucks it up like a sponge. Yes, it’s like any great battle, but so was the Anthony case, in a sense, and that one lasted nearly 3 years. Wow! What a build up and what a let down. The only thing is, we can’t obscure facts by skewing history and the truth.

Jeff Ashton was but one of three assistant state attorneys that took on the mammoth and monumental task of prosecuting Casey Anthony. That’s one third, folks, not one person. He was merely a co-prosecutor. Sure, the State should have won, but it didn’t, and we now have a retired prosecutor with a rather sterling 30 year career who is running for political office. I’m hearing some reverberations from several detractors around the Web. I do find it amazing that some people look upon him as a loser because of one case, but that’s the way we live today - for the here and the now, and everyone has personality conflicts. One thing we need to remember is that, during his 30 year career, he tried “some 70 homicide cases” and won all 12 of his “capital murder trials.” (See: Orlando magazine, Dec., 2011., The Prosecution Can’t Rest)

Ashton was the first prosecutor in the nation to gain the conviction of a rapist as a result of DNA evidence. In 1987, Tommy Lee Andrews was found guilty and sentenced to 22 years in prison. That was just over 24 years ago, when he was a young man around 30-years-old. A Florida appeals court upheld the conviction and the state became the first in the nation to affirm DNA evidence. That’s quite a statement, folks. And he’s not one to back away from anything.

Here’s my opinion — take it or leave it. Jeff Ashton is a fierce competitor. Here is a man who did his best for Caylee Anthony. What do you think he would do in the wake of that loss? Quit? Just write books? Do speaking tours? Sure, he could do that, and he should, but he now chooses to stick around and fight for future Caylees and everyone else in Orange and Osceola counties seeking justice. That shows you he’s dedicated and determined and not a quitter. I dare say he doesn’t know how to quit — not the driven man that I have learned to know and respect. Tomorrow morning at 11:00 am, I will be standing on the courthouse steps when he officially announces his candidacy and I will urge him on. 

(Also see Orlando Sentinel)

Jeff Ashton to run for State Attorney?

The Orlando Sentinel and WESH are reporting that Jeff Ashton is poised to announce his run for state attorney. He will make his announcement on the steps of the Orange County Courthouse on Tuesday morning at 11:00 AM. WESH quoted Ashton and the Sentinel speculated.

Lawson Lamar is the present state attorney for the Ninth Circuit Court. He has enjoyed running unopposed in the past, so this should be interesting. Personally, I think Ashton would be a great choice. At present, he is taking care of his best-selling book responsibilities (Imperfect Justice) and, since the trial ended, working as a consultant for the Maitland, FL law firm of Troum & Wallsh.

Just after 6:00 pm today, this statement was made on his official Facebook page: “Please stay tuned we will be releasing more information on what next and how everyone can help, in the next few days. Till then have a happy new year.

Incidentally, Judge Stan Strickland left the bench today. We all wish him the very best in his future endeavors.

Hot off the press!

Anthony Colarossi is the senior court reporter for the Orlando Sentinel. While attending the court proceedings during the Anthony case, both the hearings and trial, we got to know and respect each other. I guess it’s because we were, pretty much, the only ones who actually published our stories instead of presenting them on-air - not to take away from Steve Helling of People magazine. Of course, Anthony is a well-respected journalist and I was just a blogger until I was hired by Orlando magazine to cover the story. One day during the trial, a CNN producer followed me around and wrote about it on the CNN Website. She told me I went into this as a journalist without portfolio and transformed myself into a journalist with portfolio. That’s not easy to do, she added, and I never forgot those words.

Anthony is someone I not only respect, I genuinely like him as a person. I think we talked every single day, and there’s no doubt in my mind that he’s someone you’d like to call a friend, and say so proudly. He’s a consummate professional and he, too, appreciated my writing on a professional level. I would not consider myself in the same league as him for a couple of reasons. We are different types of writers. Where I could write in-depth articles, newspapers won’t allow it while reporting on day-to-day events. An extreme example of this would be USA Today. Short and sweet. What you read there could be read off a telepromptor by a TV personality. Anthony’s articles go deeper than that, but not as deep as mine. Even so, he’s a better writer overall and there’s no real way to compare us.

In today’s edition of the paper, in print and online, he published a very compelling article (and more in-depth) about the Anthony trial and how much the case consumed us in 2011. It’s spread out over two pages and it’s an excellent read…

Casey Anthony case consumed Orlando, nation in 2011

Snakes and Rats and Spiders, Oh My!

Dr. Eddie DelValle is a humble man. He is the CEO and president of TBC Productions, which focuses on natural healing. He also runs With Love Ministries, a traveling Christian community service organization. Late Saturday afternoon, he was cleaning up the grounds on Suburban Drive, where Caylee Anthony’s remains were found on December 11, 2008. He does this at the request of the Chickasaw Oaks neighborhood, where George and Cindy reside, and for Bring Kids Home, the public charity that aspires to build a memorial on the Suburban site. While you may not recognize Eddie, he organized the Peace Walk for Caylee just hours after her mother was released from jail on July 17 of this year. He also put together the Suburban Drive balloon release, which I did attend, on August 5, Caylee’s 6th birthday. When Michelle Parker went missing, he was in charge of the candlelight vigil held for her on November 20. She disappeared 3-days earlier, on the 17th.

Since I began writing about the Caylee Anthony case, way back in 2008, I have been as pragmatic as possible. I can’t tell you how many times I said that a memorial for her on the site where she was found was not only impractical, it was downright dangerous. I still believe that, but after seeing what Bring Kids Home wants to do, I have softened a bit. While I still believe a memorial would be better served elsewhere, I do admire the plans put forth by the charity. However, one of my main arguments remains the same - that Caylee did not die there, and a memorial would only serve to remind us that she was tossed out like a bag of trash. Literally.

Speaking of Trash

While the Bring Kids Home plan still remains a dream, reality brings me back to the same message I preached when countless people wanted it to be a permanent shrine. There’s a school at the east end of Suburban Drive. Children walk by it during the school year. Granted, the sidewalk is across the street, but leaving countless stuffed animals is very enticing to children. They act as magnets. The ground drops down several feet, and it’s sometimes flooded. In the world we live in today, you could say it’s not user friendly.

I was there Saturday afternoon, watching Eddie clean up. All of the stuffed animals, save one, were tossed into garbage bags. He takes them home and slowly has them, piece-by-piece, hauled away with his household trash. There’s just too much to take at one time. I told him I had a problem with the type of memorial that’s there now because it invites rats, snakes, and other types of vermin that could harm school-age children and unsuspecting visitors who just stop by to pay their respects. Eddie’s wife was sitting in the van, but she told me she had seen a huge spider earlier. Eddie made a good-sized fist and said it was all of that, if not bigger. We all agreed that it’s not the kind of environment conducive for a memorial. Not in its present form, anyway. The new memorial plan is to elevate the land and keep it clean. I’ve seen architectural renderings and they look magnificent, but now, it’s just a repository for filthy stuffed animals and one more very important thing… MOLD. Yes, bags and bags of moldy stuffed animals are thrown away each time Eddie makes the rounds. Mold and mildew is not good for the lungs. It is unhealthy and his message was clear - if you want to bring something in honor of Caylee, bring flowers. Almost every stuffed animal is thrown away, so your money is going to waste. Some of the animals were large, too, probably costing $50 or more, only to be hauled away to spend the their remaining days in a landfill. What a nice reminder.

Why not donate the money spent to a good charity instead? Why not donate money to Bring kids Home if you want the location to be a permanent marker for Caylee? Like I said, only one was good enough to save. Eddie told me that the good ones go to homeless or domestic violence shelters. Why don’t visitors do just that? Stop by and pay your respects; then give. Help others instead of the vermin. I noticed that some of those stuffed animals were ripped into, and stuffing was coming out. What a perfect for rats to collect bedding! Better yet, Eddie said, what a great place to make a bed. How inviting.

Let the pictures tell the story…

CLICK ANY IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Eddie said he watched a hawk follow me as I drove up, and as I was walking around taking pictures, he tried to point it out to me. He seemed somewhat amazed because the hawk kept it’s eyes on me. “He keeps watching you,” he said. I was rather unfazed, but it was an interesting part of my visit to Suburban Drive. I told him it was the same lightpole OCSO used for measuring where Caylee’s skull rested. It was a fixed point. I distinctly remember those coordinates. 89’ east of the lightpole, 19’8” due south. It’s the 6th photo down in this series - the one with the light brown teddy bear at its base. When I took the pictures of the hawk, his (or her) stare shifted away from me, but he knew I was there. It’s almost as if he proudly posed for my camera. In the bottom image, he seems to be keeping a watchful eye over that sad and lonely place in the woods.

It was 3 Years Ago Today...

From the Court House...

I attended the hearing yesterday — the one pertaining to the release of the video deposition of a tricked out defendant in camouflage that the Morgan & Morgan law firm took on October 8. She continuously invoked her 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination, so, in essence, no reliable information came out of the deposition. Morgan & Morgan represents Zenaida Gonzalez in the civil suit against the mother of Caylee Anthony, accused of her murder and acquitted on July 5 of all charges except lying to law enforcement. She has been in hiding since her release from the Orange County Jail on July 17, and for good reason. She is one of the most hated persons in the world.

John Morgan argued that the defendant has no special rights that should prevent the video from being released under Florida’s liberal open government in the sunshine law. For the defense, Andrew Chmelir argued that there was absolutely no reason for releasing the information, and that if it were to become public, it would open his client up to greater scrutiny and hinder her right to a fair trial. Circuit Judge Lisa T. Munyon is presiding over the civil case and, after listening to both sides, she said she has 10-days to decide and will issue an order within that time frame.

Initially, I was against the lawsuit for a number of reasons. One was that Zenaida is only one of a dozen or so people in the immediate area who share the same name as the fictitious nanny named back in July of 2008 as Caylee’s kidnapper. The Zenaida represented by Morgan is the only one suing for defamation. She cites that her good name was ruined and she has been unable to work ever since. Personally, I think it is time for her to move on with her life, but at the same time, I am in agreement with the plaintiff to a certain extent. John Morgan told her from the start that there would most likely be no money forthcoming if she wins the suit because the defendant would not make money off the death of her daughter. Of course, that was prior to the verdict, when most people, including Morgan, felt she would be spending the rest of her life behind bars or sentenced to death. Since her acquittal, she has yet to capitalize on her story, and rightfully so. Public outrage is so strong, for any media outlet to touch it would surely be toxic. Besides, as Judge Stan Strickland once said, the truth and Ms. Anthony are strangers. You can’t believe a word she says. Why would any entity pay for lies?

Today, I do think that Zenaida Gonzalez deserves to have her good name back, but is it necessary to win the lawsuit in order to achieve it? I don’t know, but it wouldn’t hurt. For sure, Ms. Anthony should have been more forthright about this particular Zenaida, so in that regard, especially since Jose Baez admitted in his opening statement that Caylee was dead all along, his client could have readily dispatched this particular Zenaida and no harm would have been done.

Which way am I leaning about the release of the deposition video? Although I do not think it will hurt Ms. Anthony, I’m not sure why it should be. For one thing, I disagree with her defense’s argument that it would impede her right to a fair trial, where the case would be litigated in a courtroom, not in front of the media and under public scrutiny. After all, she can’t receive any more damage than she’s already brought upon herself, right? But on the other hand, I’m not sure one of Morgan’s arguments is all that valid. Does a law firm’s video deposition fall under the same rule of discovery as the state? In my humble opinion, I don’t think so, so how will the judge rule? I don’t have a clue, but it will be very interesting to find out. How many of us really want to see her? Be honest.

§

Why did I decide to attend the hearing? Oh, I guess it was for old time’s sake. I expected to run into some of the same people I mingled with throughout the hearings and, of course, the trial. I felt it would be very good to let everyone know about my health, too, and I was right. There were days during the trial when I looked like death warmed over. One of the deputies told me, “And then you had to run home and write about the day, only to return in the morning.” He was right, and I told him it was more than just that. I had a very disciplined and demanding editor who yelled more than Great Caesar’s ghost! at some of the things I wrote. I will admit that the experience taught me a lot about writing, thanks to him.

It was a very good day to mingle and reminisce. It was also good to re-acquaint myself with John Morgan from years ago, and he was curious about me, meaning he certainly knew who I was. To be honest, he is a very friendly and approachable sort, and extremely polite. When his son, Matt, saw us talking, he made it a point to introduce himself, too. There was no huge ego. Obviously, his mother and father brought him up right, and no doubt, he’s got a tremendous future ahead and I wish him all the best.

Finally, allow me to put one rumor to bed. According to an extremely reliable source, who shall remain nameless, Judge Strickland is relinquishing his bench for exactly the reason he stated. After 16 years, he wants out. He wants to help his wife with her business. This has absolutely nothing to do with any sort of investigation into how he handled the issue with the “blogger” named Marinade Dave or his statements made after the trial on Nancy Grace. Yes, WFTV hinted that there may just be an investigation, but my source was quick to point out that Channel 9 is the first and biggest one to sensationalize the news. Anything for ratings.

Rest assured, there is no investigation and Judge Strickland had every right to say anything he wanted after the trial ended. Besides, he already knew by then that he was going to retire. The decision was something he gave much thought to. This is a judge who so richly deserves a huge round of applause from all of us. I am honored to know him.

I will be away from my computer for several hours today. If you get caught in moderation, I will let you out when I can - later today.

The convenience of karma and the cancer disconnect

I want to thank everyone for their concern over my health. I came out a victor in Round 1. The bone marrow biopsy showed no cancer in my blood or marrow. Previously, I had been diagnosed with chronic anemia and thrombocytopenia, which is low platelets. Yesterday, a new diagnosis was added to the list… monoclonal gammapathy. That’s abnormal plasma cells in the bone marrow. I will have to learn to live with it. There is a risk, albeit low, that it may develop into cancer one day, but I’ll take that with a smile. Friday, I get the lung biopsy. I was supposed to have it this morning (10/4), but no one told me to stop taking baby aspirin.

There is little understanding about what caused the blood conditions to manifest. They just strike people. At least I can stop worrying about it, although I will have to be checked every 3 months to keep tabs on whether it does turn into cancer, but if so, it could be years down the road.

I really wanted to go to the hearing on Wednesday afternoon — the one concerning the motion WKMG-TV filed that asked the court to release a video recording of Mizzanthony’s shocked and distressed jail house reaction to news that her daughter’s remains were found very near to where she lived. You see, back in 2009, Judge Stan Strickland agreed with the defense that the video would have been too prejudicial to show a jury because it could have negatively affected her right to a fair trial. Consequently, he sealed it. That was then, and now that the trial is over, what harm would it do to release it? After all, the defense openly admitted she knew all along that her child was dead.

WKMG’s attorney, Jack Kirschenbaum, stood toe-to-toe with Jose Baez in court, both arguing in front of Chief Judge Belvin Perry. While Kirschenbaum cited Florida’s open government in the sunshine laws, Baez stuck with his concerns over medical privacy. Perry is expected to render a decision by week’s end, and my educated guess is that he will side with the media. Why? Because administering the defendant a sedative in a waiting room with a TV does not constitute doctor/client privilege. Besides, the issue over the defendant receiving a fair trial is no longer a factor.

One of the reasons I wanted to attend the hearing was to see some of the people I interacted with during the course of the case — countless reporters, deputies, attorneys, and the bevy of courthouse employees and everyday people I got to meet. You know, for old-time’s sake. I had an 11:30 appointment to see my gastroenterologist and I figured I’d have plenty of time to make it to the courthouse by 3:00. Alas, I didn’t leave the doctor’s office until then. The doctor explained, apologetically, that it wasn’t from overbooking as much as it was from the federal government’s new law mandating that all medical offices must be computerized or face stringent penalties. I understand how the learning curve would be difficult for medical personnel of a given age, plus the fact that the software is quite complex and not mastered in a day. In any event, the only outcome of my day was learning that I will have both an endoscopy and a colonoscopy on October 18. Whoopee! Fortunately, I will be sedated.

Since I’m addressing doctors, sedatives, journalists and the court system, I’m going to haphazardly segue into one word that kept creeping up during the course of the whole Anthony ordeal — karma. But before I get into it, I want to apologize for not being all that attentive on my blog of late. For sure, I wanted a lengthy break after the crux of the Anthony mess came tumbling down in July, but it’s pushing October and I feel I owe you a legitimate explanation. I’ll get to that shortly.

Dictionary.com defines karma as “an action, seen as bringing upon oneself inevitable results, good or bad, either in this life or in a reincarnation.” It goes on to mention fate and destiny as descriptors. Unfortunately for some of my readers, I have a real problem with karma. To be quite frank, I just don’t believe in it and I’ll tell you why. Take the case of Mizzanthony. All through the legal process, countless numbers of people were adamant about her karma coming back to “bite her in her azz”, only it didn’t happen that way. Otherwise, she would have been found guilty and sentenced to life or death for murdering her daughter, Caylee Marie. Speaking of Caylee, what did she do to warrant such horrendous karma that she had to die at such a young and innocent age? If karma killed Lee Harvey Oswald, what karma killed JFK?

While karma was a constant theme during the Anthony case, it was only used matter of factly, as a matter of convenience. In other words, when karma failed to get the defendant while incarcerated and tried in open court, it morphed into something else — that karma will get her while she’s out of jail and free. Just move the karma around to suit one’s fancy. Some people actually believe they have power over people by inflicting karma. Take a look at the slugs that attacked me and my friends unmercifully during the past two years. Karma was going to get us because they had ordained it so. In that regard, karma is pitted against karma; the good karma being us and the bad karma being them, although they would stupidly beg to differ. May the best karma win! Caylee’s mother may live to be 90, but karma will catch up to her then? Come on, we all know better than that. Eventually, she will have to meet her maker, and that’s what counts.

Regardless, karma goes against the will of God, at least in the Judeo-Christian sense. I don’t think the Bible puts much faith in reincarnation, for example, and I think it’s safe to say that most of my blog’s readers fall under the auspices of the Judeo-Christian credo and, therefore, karma is a direct conflict with the principles of both books of the Bible, although Job 4:8 (KJV) does state, “Even as I have seen, they that plow iniquity, and sow wickedness, reap the same,” but I’m not about to get all preachy on you. In this particular regard, a simple explanation can be found with one of our contemporaries, Orenthal James Simpson.

While O.J. was acquitted of murdering Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman in 1995, he sits in Lovelock Correctional Center in Nevada until, at least, 2017; sentenced to 33-years for kidnapping and armed robbery in 2008. His first possibility of parole comes in 2017, but don’t count on it. Was it karma that finally caught up with him? Hardly. You see, if you hang around bad people and do bad things, your odds of getting caught multiply tremendously. That’s precisely what happened to OJ, plain and simple. He was responsible for his own undoing because he chose to hang around a bad crowd. He did it to himself, with no help from fate, destiny, karma, kismet, or whatever else you want to call it. He chose his own path.

That leads this article to yours truly and how karma did not come beckoning at my front door. Conveniently, the devil’s rejects who attacked me incessantly during the past two years will rejoice after reading this, but I don’t care. While they are sure I am Satan incarnate, sane people know otherwise. You know me as a caring individual. You know my sensitive side. Understanding human behavior is not in a troll’s vocabulary. For them to compare me to Hitler and Stalin¹, two of the worst people to ever walk the earth, is pure insanity. How anyone could make a comparison like that is beyond the realm of accepted behavior. Well, enough of them and their trashy troll talk.

Everyone who has followed me for the past three years knows that I’ve had a number of health issues, none karma related. Recently, I was able to get some complex blood work done. One of those tests showed an abnormality in my blood protein, specifically, elevated M protein. For years now, my platelets have been quite low, along with RBC, hemoglobin and hematocrit counts. I was diagnosed with thrombocytopenia and chronic anemia years ago. Trust me when I tell you I am not seeking sympathy of any kind, nor am I looking for any sort of hand-out.

I have been seeing a specialist in the field of hematology and oncology. You know, a blood disorder and cancer doctor. I have had x-rays taken of every bone in my body in search of lesions. I have had CT scans and PET scans. I also had an MRI. Why my veins haven’t collapsed by now is beyond me. On Monday, my hematology/oncology doctor performed a bone marrow biopsy on my right hip. Believe me, in my case, it wasn’t nearly as painful as it sounds. While those tests were being performed, something new crept up; something totally unrelated to the problem with my blood. Something that put everything else on hold.

My long-time readers will remember when I was laid up with pneumonia back in December of 2008. It was confined to my right lung, and it’s not at all unusual to recur at any time in the future. Here’s where the karma comes in, or should I say, lack of karma? Some of the recent tests showed “an infiltrate is present within the left upper lobe and the right major fissure thickening.”

What this means is that there is an astute possibility that I have a cancerous tumor in my left lung, as in lung cancer. That’s something no one wants to hear. My doctor said it was large, and the PET result stated it had an “uptake value of 2.7.” The injection I got before the scan contained a radioactive substance and glucose. Cancer cells absorb the material 10-times more than healthy cells, so they light up like Christmas trees. 2.7 is not full-blown cancer like 5.0, but it’s enough to make any doctor sit up and take notice. It’s also the reason why all other health concerns are now on hold. The “major fissure thickening” is the area between lobes, near a vertebra. While that one shows no sign of cancer at this time, it may down the road. Next week, I will be put under a derivative of morphine and Valium, and my left lung will be biopsied. No matter what it is, and I’m fairly certain I know, the growth will most likely be removed after it’s evaluated.

This is just the start of many pokes and probes and possible operations. Trust me when I say it has weighed heavily on my mind, as my close friends and family will attest. Here and now, I am going to explain the matter of karma. I never did anything morally wrong enough for some silly karma to come and get me, despite being bitten in the azz by a biopsy needle. No, this problem has nothing to do with karma. The only thing that matters is the fact that I smoked cigarettes and cigars for nearly 40-years. It was my choice to smoke and no one else’s, and it’s what caused it. (I did quit four years ago.)

When giving my mother the news, I told her the most important part — the only reason why it was found early was because of tests taken for another type of cancer. Had I not had those tests at this time, odds are it wouldn’t have been diagnosed until it was too late. I have no real symptoms and that’s the problem. By the time real symptoms creep up on you, this type of cancer, which is extremely aggressive, has grown arms and legs and spread like wildfire. That’s the main reason why lung cancer has such a high mortality rate.

While I will insist it’s not karma, I will say I do believe in divine intervention, although I’m no authority on it. I think, in my case, it’s what made sure the right tests were performed at the right time — that caught it early enough. At least, that’s what I’m praying. So, if you wonder why I haven’t written much lately, truth be told, I’ll readily admit I’ve rested on my laurels, I can be a great procrastinator, and I have a lazy streak at times. But one thing is certain — there’s a lot on my mind right now that limits my creativity and I shouldn’t be that way. I need to find new stories to write about, but until I do, please bear with me. While I do not believe in karma, I do believe in the power of prayer, and that’s precisely what I am asking you to do. Please keep me in your prayers. That’s all I ask.

And if you smoke, please quit now.

Sunday Afternoon Murder Club - Death Penalty

The gang will be back on Sunday at 4pm eastern. The gang being Simon and Jan Barrett, Crime Writer and author Denny Griffin, veteran trial attorney Mannie Barling, journalist Dave Knechel, and Bail Bonds expert William Cobra Staubs.

Join us at 4pm Eastern and join in the chat, the link to listen in live here.

Judge Perry's Order Sounds "Appealing"

In the beginning of September, 2008, the Orange County Sheriff’s Office said that lab tests confirmed that a decomposing body had been in the trunk of George and Cindy Anthony’s 1998 Pontiac Sunfire. “[FBI] laboratory evidence, along with additional evidence that has not been made public, leads investigators to the belief there is a strong probability that Caylee is deceased.”

Sgt. John Allen added that, “The information we’ve gotten back from the lab [was] that she was in the trunk of that car and that she is dead is certainly something we take seriously.”

By September 21, detectives noted that there were still lab tests pending, plus evidence not yet made public. According to OCSO, no homicide-related charges would be filed until they could determine if the child died and her body ended up in the trunk. As a matter of fact, throughout the month of September, it was looking very clear that Caylee was deceased and the odor of death in the trunk of the Pontiac and a combination of forensic evidence would be enough for an Orange County grand jury to indict her mother on First-Degree (Capital) Murder and other charges on October 14, including Aggravated Child Abuse, Aggravated Manslaughter of a Child, and four counts of Providing False Information to a Law Enforcement Officer. 

Certainly, there was plenty of evidence by then to gain convictions as far as the public was concerned, but on July 5 of this year, a jury found the defendant not guilty of the first three felony charges and guilty of the remaining four misdemeanor charges of lying to law enforcement. The public was shocked and outraged. The State Attorney’s Office had put an awful lot of work into this case that took nearly three years to come to an abrupt end. Law enforcement kept plugging away even as the trial unfolded. Everyone on the state’s side wanted nothing more than justice, but during this period, costs spiraled higher and higher it wasn’t until recently that a matter of cost came before the court. Someone’s got to pay for all this labor intensive work, right?

On September 2, 2011, the state filed an “Amended Motion to Tax Special Costs of Investigation and Prosecution and to Reserve Jurisdiction” pursuant to Florida Statute 938.27. The original motion, “State of Florida’s Motion to Tax Special Costs of Investigation and Prosecution and to Reserve Jurisdiction” was filed on July 6, a day after the defendant was acquitted of the felony charges.

The amount the state was requesting was to the tune of $517,000, broken into separate agencies, including the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE), the Metropolitan Bureau of Investigation (FDLE), the Orange County Sheriff’s Office (OCSO), and last but not least, the State Attorney’s Office.

The state wanted the defendant to pay for the investigation from its inception, on July 15, 2008, when she told authorities her first lie, to December 19, 2008, the date when skeletal remains found a week earlier were positively identified to be those of Caylee Marie Anthony.

On paper, the state’s proposition sounded about right, but it wasn’t, according to the law. There’s no doubt the amount of hours it took to come this far were phenomenal. Who kept lying and lying and lying to police until her attorney put a clamp on her mouth? The fact remains that this whole affair could have ended a long time ago had it not been for her. She would have saved the state, not to mention taxpayers, tons of money had she just told the… [sorry, that word is not in her vocabulary].

I know my opinion on this is not going to be popular, but it follows how Judge Perry ruled today. Allow me to place myself in a situation that may shed a little light on the decision…

Suppose I’m visiting old friends in New Jersey during a specific time period. I rode up with a buddy. During that time someone (allegedly) stole my car and robbed a convenience store in my neighborhood. The perp is bald like me, so when the cops show the store owner my picture, he says, “That’s him!”

My car is impounded and examined, and the only set of prints on it are mine. Meanwhile, I come home to a 24-hour stake-out, and I’m promptly thrown to the ground, handcuffed and arrested. Here’s the deal - my friend is deposed but the cops don’t believe him. The state indicts me. Meanwhile, my friends in NJ are reluctant to testify on my behalf. Unfortunately, some of the evidence makes me look bad because the police find out I had been dating the owner’s daughter and we had a rocky relationship until it finally ended. It turns out the father never liked me to begin with.

Eventually, the case goes to trial, some of my out-of-state friends are subpoenaed, and the jury finds me not guilty. Should I be required to pay for the entire investigation? How about any of it? After all, ultimately, I did nothing wrong. 

There’s the dilemma. Who foots the bill? In my case, it’s fairly cut-and-dry. I was, in no way, involved and the law is on my side. No one should pay money for an ill-fated investigation. How many people a year are charged by overzealous prosecutors? That’s not my point, though.

In this particular defendant’s case, she lead authorities to dead end after dead end. She lied through her teeth and impeded a legitimate investigation. The entire nation prayed that little Caylee would be found alive, while her devious mother laughed behind everyone’s back. She should be forced to pay, right? Well, yes and no.

The investigation into the missing toddler began on July 15, 2008, when Cindy Anthony made her desperate 911 calls. Yes, initially, it was a missing child case, but somewhere along the line, it switched from that to a murder investigation. Caylee was dead. That’s where the impounded Sunfire became so crucial. Sometime in September of 2008, the gears switched from missing to dead.

On September 2, 2011, the judge heard testimony from both sides. The state wanted the charges to encompass a five month period, from July 15 - December 19, 2008. The defense argued that their client was found not guilty of murder, including the other felony charges. How could the court force her to pay for something she was found not guilty of? The defense asked for the final tally to represent July 15 to September 30, a two-and-a-half-month period, because, after that date, investigators were no longer seeking a missing child - they were looking for a deceased one.

The judge agreed. Just like in my case, why should a person be forced to pay for an investigation when the verdict is in the defendant’s favor? If that were the case, police and prosecutors would be charging people left and right for crimes they never committed in order to fill state coffers. As much as Jose Baez’s client is unpopular, the law is the law and Judge Perry had to rule the way he did.

Section 938.27, Florida Statute (2011) provides, in part:

In all criminal and violation-of-probation or community-control cases, convicted [my emphasis] persons are liable for payment of the costs of prosecution, including investigative costs incurred by law enforcement agencies, [etc.] For purposes of this section, “convicted” means a determination of guilt, or of violation of probation or community control, [etc.]

The court shall impose the costs of prosecution and investigation notwithstanding the defendant’s ability to pay. The court shal require the defendant to pay the costs within a specified period or in specified installments.

In his ruling, Judge Perry acknowledged that “there are costs that may be taxed against Defendant because they were reasonably necessary to prove the charges in Counts 4 through 7, for which she was convicted.” Therein lies the crux of the argument. For which she was convicted. You cannot charge any amount of money on not guilty verdicts according to the law, no matter how one may personally feel. The judge had no choice because he had to follow the letter of the law.

While the judge acknowledged that there are no Florida cases dealing with apportioning the costs after a criminal trial when a defendant has been convicted of some charges but acquitted of others, there is some guidance in federal case law “which provides that costs associated exclusively with the prosecution of counts which are discharged cannot be assessed against the defendant.”

“When a statute is clear, courts will not look behind the statute’s plain language for legislative intent.” City of Miami Beach v. Galbut, 626 So. 2d 192, 193 (Fla. 1993), and Holly v. Auld, 450 So. 2d 217, 219 (Fla. 1984).

“A statute’s plain and ordinary meaning must control, unless this leads to an unreasonable result or a result clearly contrary to legislative intent.” State v. Burris, 875 So. 2d 408, 410 (Fla. 2004).

“Cost provisions are a creature of statute and must be carefully construed.” Wolf v. County of Volusia, 703 So. 2d 1033, 1034 (Fla. 1997).

Based on case law, Judge Perry decided that the costs incurred by investigators would be from July 15, 2008 through September 29, 2008. That was the period, he decided, all costs incurred were “reasonably related to the investigative work provided as a result of Defendant providing false information as to the location of her [then missing] daughter, Caylee Anthony, and making other mistrepresentations to law enforcement.”

End of story. We may not like it, but that’s the law and that’s why the judge ruled the way he did. The breakdown of what he granted looks like this:

• FDLE - $61,505.12
• MBI - $10,283.90
• OCSO - $25,837.96 (the Court found that several of the reports were not adequately broken down, and in order to reimburse OCSO for additional work, they must file a revised expense report with the Court by 4:00 PM on September 19. At that point, the order will be amended accordingly.)
• With regard to the costs incurred by the Office of the State Attorney, in accordance with Florida Statute 938.287(8), the State Attorney is entitled to a total amount of $50 for each of the misdemeanor convictions. Grand total? 200 buckeroos. Personally, I think it’s an insult,

All in all, the defendant will have to cough up $97,676.98, not a pittance by any means, but not close to the amount the state requested. How is she going to pay? Oh, I think her attorneys will find the tally quite “appealing”, if you get my drift. Speaking of drift, would we know how to contact Mr. Baez about this? I hear Aruba ta bunita this time of year.

FOOD FOR THOUGHT

On December 3, 2009, I met with Sgt. John Allen at the sheriff’s office on West Colonial Drive. This was in reference to a matter regarding something someone said to me and photographs I was shown that may have been relevant to the investigation. He called me the day before. After I gave him my testimony and filled out a report, we sat around for a few minutes and discussed different aspects of the case. At no time did he reveal anything that would be harmful had I written about it, but I told him I wouldn’t. We spoke on the phone 2-4 times after that, and at one point, he said it was okay for me to write whatever we had discussed. I had a green light, and one thing came to mind. He was emphatic about it, too. Up until the remains were found and identified, over 100 law enforcement personnel never gave up hope of finding Caylee alive. All around the country, investigators continued to follow up on leads. That’s how dedicated they were, and that tells me there’s a gray area the judge should have known about. Whether it can be substantiated, I don’t know, but it is worth considering, in my opinion.

Examining the Examiner

Recently, a news story surfaced that claimed Caylee Anthony’s mother had “inked a multi-media deal, 6 figure cash advance.” Several local media outlets in Orlando, and perhaps elsewhere in the country, credited the Los Angeles Examiner with the shocking revelation. There’s a serious flaw with that claim because there is no such publication as the Los Angeles Examiner. The Los Angeles Examiner was founded in 1903 by William Randolph Hearst. In 1962, it merged with the Los Angeles Herald-Express and became the Los Angeles Herald Examiner. On November 2, 1989, it published its last edition. While that paper folded, the San Francisco Examiner, also once owned by Hearst, is still in business, and at one time, the two papers complemented each other.

Today, a new breed of “newspapers” have entered the fray of Internet-based media outlets. While these new kids on the block print no paper editions, they are still loosely considered newspapers to some extent. One of them is Examiner.com, and it has absolutely nothing to do with any real newspaper, in print and online form, with Examiner in its name. The Washington Examiner and the San Francisco Examiner are two examples of print and online versions and there is a lot of confusion between Examiner.com and those two legitimate Examiner newspapers. To clarify the difference, let’s clear up any confusion. Examiner.com is a division of the Clarity Media Group, which is wholly owned by The Anschutz Company. Clarity Media Group is the parent company of the Washington and San Francisco newspapers. However, neither are affiliated with Examiner.com. The CEO of Examiner.com, Rick Blair, asserted that, “We offer stories about the best bike trips in the city and where to go on the weekend. We’re really not covering news.”¹

A few years ago, I thought about applying for one of the Examiner openings. I don’t recall what position it was specifically, i.e., Orlando Flirting Examiner, Orlando Drinking Games Examiner, Orlando Beauty After 50 Examiner, or whatever. (Actually, those are job offerings as of today.) Yes, whatever it was, Examiner.com seemed to promise more than it could deliver right from the start, and I walked away without applying. Their Website claims that you can:

• Earn extra income writing about what you love.
• Build your portfolio and gain valuable experience.
• Set your own hours
• Work from home

All of this sounds enticing because “IT PAYS TO BE AN EXAMINER!”

Rosetta Thurman is the author of Blogging for Branding.  Her Website claims that no one writes for “The Examiner,” you simply become an Examiner. From the Blogging for Branding Website:

I see a lot of people saying that they “write for the Examiner,” which is incorrect and misleading. Examiner.com itself is clear that (my bold emphasis):

“We are powered by Examiners, the largest pool of knowledgeable and passionate contributors in the world. Examiners provide unique and original content to enhance life in your local city wherever that may be.”

You are called “an Examiner” as a title that identifies you as a writer for the site. It is simply a descriptive noun. Again, you do not write for any of the Examiner newspapers in any way. Yet it’s a misconception that the site obviously profits from.

Now that we are aware of what Examiner.com is all about, let’s take a look at the bottom line. What kind of money can an Examiner make? Examiner.com bases its compensation on page view traffic, subscriptions, session length and advertiser interest, but it does claim that contributing writers should not consider a writing gig as any sort of full-time employment, and it “tries to be very clear and transparent that this isn’t a ‘quit your day job’ opportunity.”

WritersWeekly claims to be the “highest-circulation freelance writing ezine in the world.” Examiners were issued a call by WritersWeekly to share their experiences. After the interviews, an article was published on the site (no author credit) that consolidated the math of the respondents and claimed that the estimated cost per-article looked like this:

Penny $ 2.09 per article
Barbie $ 2.30 per article
Mario $ 0.07 per article
Katrina $ 1.96 per article
Tim $ 0.88 per article
Clark $ 1.60 per article
Franny $ 0.37 per article
Kathryn $ 1.96 per article
Courtney $ 1.88 per article

Average: $1.46 per article

Some had written hundreds of articles (usually 400-600 words each) and these were their averages. One claimed to make 10 cents per hour when all was said and done. WritersWeekly also noted that most of the pay-per-click contracts require continued contributions from writers, so if you stop writing for Examiner.com, you lose your residual income while they keep making money in perpetuity.

While many media outlets claimed that the defunct Los Angeles Examiner published the article about the Anthony book deal, it was not remotely close to the kind of newspaper the mind generally conjures up when mentioned by legitimate media sources. To make things more clear, the Orlando Sentinel  and Orlando magazine have print and online editions, whereas, Examiner.com merely has an online presence. Writers for the Orlando publications are real journalists. Those with Examiner.com cannot make that claim for the most part. That takes us to the article that started this mess. Written by Donna Thomas, the LA Crime Examiner, who is she?

Her Examiner bio says she “is a published author. She is a frequent contributor on different true crime cases. She has interviewed everyone from Ted Bundy to the Unabomber.” All fine and good, right?

Garth Stapley is a journalist with the The Modesto Bee. In a January 7, 2008 article, Stapley wrote that “Scott Peterson strangled his pregnant wife in their kitchen on Christmas Eve 2002, according to a book written by a woman claiming he confessed to her 15 months ago during a prison visit.” (See: Author says Peterson confessed how and why he killed Laci)

Stapley pointed out that Thomas’s book contained a number of inconsistencies with her first, self-published, book and with statements she made to The Modesto Bee in interviews during a 19-month period. According to Stapley:

His appellate lawyers in October issued a terse statement confirming that their client had contact with Thomas, but denying that Peterson made statements attributed to him in publicity for the book.

“It is unclear what the motivation was for Ms. Thomas’ initial contact with Mr. Peterson,” East Bay attorneys Larry Gibbs and Cliff Gardner wrote to The Bee. “We are unsure of her motive in writing the book after Mr. Peterson broke off contact with Ms. Thomas, but it was not the search for truth.”

Thomas’s “I’m sorry I lied to you” book did not cite her first book, “Conduct Unbecoming - However, the Scott Peterson I Know Is Innocent”, either. She told the newspaper that she had passed a polygraph regarding Peterson’s alleged jailhouse confession, but she never produced proof, and she never produced any of the original letters she claimed she had received from Peterson. Here’s an interesting little tidbit, in my opinion, of course. According to Stapley, Thomas pledged “to donate a portion of her proceeds to ‘Haven/Stanuslaus (sic) Women’s Refuge.’ But Belinda Rolicheck, executive director of the Haven Women’s Center of Stanislaus, said recently she has never spoken with Thomas or her publisher.”

I think Stapley pretty much painted a picture of Donna Thomas, who I am not out to impugn at all. Instead, I strongly recommend that you read The Bee article written by Stapley and formulate your own opinion.

In the 1981 movie, “Body Heat”, William Hurt played a gullible third-rate attorney who was taken advantage of by a sinister woman played by Kathleen Turner. IMDB described it this way:

In the midst of a searing Florida heat wave, a woman convinces her lover, a small-town lawyer, to murder her rich husband.

The great Paul Newman starred in a 1982 movie titled, “The Verdict”. His character was a washed-out, drunk, ambulance chasing attorney who gets set-up to fall hard by a huge law firm headed by James Mason. How could a drunk has-been (or never-was) topple the Boston Diocese and the most powerful law firm in the city? (I urge you to watch both films.)

What this leads me to is quite simple and straightforward. Jose Baez and Cheney Mason sure looked inept in the courtroom. By that, I mean the prosecution was clear and concise and they produced compelling evidence that should have convicted Caylee Anthony’s alleged murderer. While many still argue over the outcome of the trial, one thing we did learn was that the defense was shrewd, cunning, and willing to lie in order to exonerate their client. I would assert that there’s a good possibility that Donna Thomas and Examiner.com were set-up by Baez or one of his goons. For the life of me, and this is the very first thing that came to mind, I would never suspect that a real whistle-blower would contact an Examiner to hand over an exclusive story like this one. That sort of “bombshell” belongs to the Riveras and Graces of the world, or any other legitimate and credible journalist. Thomas claims it was sources that told her, not one singular source. That’s suspect to me because she wrote most of the article using the plural, but in the end, she wrote that a source said Anthony doesn’t care if her book is boycotted or not; she has her 6-figure advance and she will be flush with money for a long time to come. The article finished by citing a source - singular - not sources, as saying anyone who thinks that crime doesn’t pay is sadly mistaken. Also, who could possibly live for a long time on a 6-figure salary, particularly after the IRS, her attorneys and handlers, and potential lawsuits are paid off?

With regard to a writer for Examiner.com, any writer, my guess is that an average pay-per-click amount would be somewhere around one cent. If a “How to make meatloaf” article written by an LA Home Recipes Examiner gets about 200 hits, it might make a whopping $2.00 for the hour it took to write. Imagine a story that draws the attention of millions of people worldwide; a powerful exclusive! How many hits would you guess it could garner? Hundreds of thousands? Millions? You know, it would be an easy incentive to make a fast buck, that’s for sure. Lots and lots of bucks, for that matter, but I’m not trying to infer anything seedy about the author. No doubt, the defense is capable of doing anything to keep their client in the limelight by planting a seed and later denying it, because that will keep her star from fading into oblivion, right? I really can’t say, but as far as I’m concerned, any way you look at it, it’s pure sleaze, from top to bottom. Bottom is more like it, and I’m not going to buy into any of it.

If you have any type of problem commenting on this or any other post, please let me know by sending me an e-mail. You can use the “Contact Me” form located at the bottom of the left sidebar. 

Of Biblical Proportions

SOLOMON, PART I

On January 27, 2010, I wrote a post titled, “The Wisdom of Solomon”. It was two days after The Honorable Judge Stan Strickland listened to Amy Huizenga’s thieving friend plead guilty to thirteen counts of fraud. Here is part of what I wrote that day:

State Attorney Frank George stood up at his respective podium and began to speak. On July 8, 2008, Casey wrote a check in the amount of $111.01 that accounted for charges 2, 3, and 4. She wrote this check at Target.  On July 10, she passed a check at Target in the amount of $137.77 that accounted for charges 5, 6, and 7. Also on July 10, she passed a third check at Target for $155.47 and that took care of counts 8, 9, and 10. Counts 11, 12, and 13 took place on July 15 when she wrote a check for $250 at the Bank of America. He then brought up count 1 which referred to a deliberate scheme of conduct overall. She planned on writing checks until they bounced off the walls, I would guess. Good thing we live in the information age, where account balances are instantaneous almost everywhere we go.

Judge Strickland gave the defense an opportunity to challenge the charges. We can discuss the lack of brevity or the levity of the arguments, but let’s cut to the chase - it came down to the judge. First, it should be noted that Casey had no prior convictions and she did make full restitution and  Baez did bring up “equal justice” for his client. He asked for one year of probation and credit for time served, rather than the five years of incarceration the State sought. In the end, His Honor sentenced the 23-year-old Casey to (jail) time served - 412 days - plus $5,517.75 in investigative costs and $348 for court. The amount may be discussed and negotiated at a later motion hearing because the defense found the investigative charge too high and not justifiable. He also adjudicated Casey guilty on six of the fraud counts and withheld adjudication on seven, plus he tacked on a year of supervised probation, which could be problematic and complex later on, given that she still faces a huge mountain of charges ahead. He said that he had given this a lot of thought prior to sentencing. “I’ve done what I thought is fair based on what I know.”

In closing, he added what he felt was the right thing to do:

“There was not an even number of offenses, so I withheld in seven, I adjudicated in six. If that seems Solomon-like, it is.”

Of particular interest now is the Solomon-like decision Judge Perry faces regarding the recent clarification of Casey’s probation period set by Judge Strickland. I find it ironic that good old Solomon once again rears his head at the now acquitted and much detested convicted felon.

MOSES, PART I

That brings me to another biblical figure - Moses. He was the guy who cast ten plagues on the people of Egypt. He also parted the Red Sea after he turned the Nile into blood. The pharoah was none too happy with that, so he let Moses and his people go out of Egypt to be slaves no more.

My reason for bringing up Moses has little to do with him, actually. It’s more about the pharaoh at the time, and what his edict was while Moses was packing up the Israelites to wander in the desert for forty years. Every mention of his name and every word etched in stone was struck from the official records. (Historical records actually show that Ramses II was not in charge at the time, but Hollywood disagrees.)

As Ramses II, Yul Brynner exclaimed in Cecil B. de Mille’s film The Ten Commandments, “So it shall be written, so it shall be done.” In this same light, I proclaim that the name Casey Anthony will no longer be permitted on this blog. It is now stricken from the record. However, I do have an appropriate replacement. We know that Caylee called Cindy Ci Ci, and George was Jo Jo. What did she call her mother? How about Ca Ca? From now on, Caylee’s mother will only be known as Ca Ca. Yes, you know how it’s pronounced.

SOLOMON, PART II

Back to the problem Judge Perry called “a legal maze” and “a legal morass”. What sort of decision should he make? According to the Department of Corrections, Ca Ca served her probation while incarcerated and was duly discharged a year later; free from all restrictions. According to what Judge Strickland said in open court on January 25, 2010, her probation was supposed to begin AFTER her release from jail, not while she was sitting in a cell, and he made it clear last week, on August 1, when he issued a corrected Order of Probation and corrected Court Minutes, nunc pro tunc to January 25, 2010. Nunc pro tunc, of course, means now for then; whatever the action is, it has a retroactive legal effect.

Here’s the dilemma. Ca Ca’s defense argues that she has served her probation while incarcerated and they have a letter from DOC to prove it. On the other hand, Judge Strickland made it abundantly clear that Ca Ca did not serve her probation as per his instructions, and his order stated that it was to begin after her release, only there was a mix-up on the first order, as written by the court. But that was not Judge Strickland’s fault. Meanwhile, Cheney Mason filed a motion on his client’s behalf, the EMERGENCY MOTION FOR HEARING TO QUASH, VACATE, AND SET ASIDE COURT’S ORDER. 

Judge Perry said (at the August 5 hearing on the matter) that what Strickland stated in court should trump all - not what the defense claimed. At the same time, Perry acknowledged that she DID serve out her probation in jail according to the Orange County Corrections Department. What a quagmire. “If anything could go wrong,” he said, “it went wrong here.”

Perry is quite aware of safety concerns, meaning keeping Ca Ca safe from harm. To openly serve probation now opens up a can of worms since her address would be made public due to Florida’s sunshine laws. You know, what with all those death threats and whatever.

Phooey. Ask OCSO how many real death threats they’ve received since her release from incarceration. From my own experience with trolls and the “vengenance is mine” crap - yes, that’s the way one idiot spelled it, insinuating harm on me - almost every one of them lives far enough away to be a real threat, although I wouldn’t trust any of them face-to-face, and that leads me back to Ca Ca. Personally, I feel she should be more afraid the farther away from home she is, as she enters uncharted territory. There are more crazies out there in the world than there are in Orlando. Believe me, I thank God for the Atlantic ocean, but that’s another story.

Ahum.

Moving on, I am left with prior motions the defense filed before the trial which asked the court to seal jail records, including visitation logs, telephone conversations and commissary purchases. They were filed and denied while Strickland was on the bench, and they were refiled, along with new ones, after Judge Perry took over. Both judges made it very clear that the judicial branch holds no legal sway over the legislative branch; the one that controls jails and prisons. Consequently, neither judge ruled in favor of the defense because they had no authority to do so.

That leads me to what I think the judge should do. Since he has no power over the jail because it’s a completely separate governmental branch from the court, his decision should be based on those prior rulings. The court does not have to honor the administrative decisions the jail makes in its day-to-day operations. What both judges have been saying all along is that they have no control over the executive branch, and at the same time, the jail has no power over the judicial. There you have it - a very simple solution to a complex problem. Ca Ca did not serve a day of probation while incarcerated because she did not satisfy the court’s order. The heck with what the jail says.

MOSES, PART II

As Ramses said about Moses, let Judge Perry say the same thing about Ca Ca. So it shall be written, so it shall be done. While he wanders through what must be at least 40 years worth of court cases, let’s see how he rules. Personally, I think the answer should be a year of supervised probation. Afterward, she can find her Promised Land. By then, she should be old news and TMZ won’t pay her another dime.

Have a Happy Heavenly Birthday!

Last Laugh?

I’m sorry. I did state that I planned on walking away from the Casey Anthony case, and it’s still my intent, but I just had to say something about today’s news. I couldn’t resist, especially when it comes to Judge Strickland…

On August 1, 2011, Judge Stan Strickland ordered Casey Anthony to serve one year of supervised probation, nunc pro tunc. Nunc pro tunc is Latin for now for then. In other words, the judge issued a new court order showing that the earlier order was in error in its interpretation by the Department of Corrections. The words upon release were omitted in the original document.

According to the Orlando Sentinel, Strickland said, “From my reading of this, she should be reporting to probation in Orlando probably within 72 hours. I suspect she’s going to be required to report to probation.”

On January 25, 2010, Anthony pleaded guilty as charged to check fraud. Her attorney, Jose Baez, asked Judge Strickland to give her credit for time served and to place her on probation for a year. He obliged by sentencing her to time served, 412 days for each of the six charges he found her guilty of , followed by one year of probation. The 412 day sentences were to be served concurrently.

At issue, upon her release from jail on July 17, 2011, was whether she had served her probation during the year following her guilty plea to fraud. Clearly, a person cannot violate probation while sitting in a 4’x9’ jail cell 23-hours each day. The judge’s intent was for Casey to serve her probation upon her release from jail, not during. Therefore, he made that very clear in his amended order today.

Casey was also ordered to pay the following amounts: $5.00 for court costs, $50.00 for CCF, $225.00 for LGCJTF, $3.00 for TEENCT, and $65.00 for the Criminal Ordinance program. She must also pay the costs of investigation and prosecution. Attached to the new order were special conditions, along with the year of probation. Of course, there’s to be no contact with the victim, Amy Huizenga, which should be no problem at all. Each month, Casey must make a “full and truthful report” to her Probation Officer, along with $20.00 (payable to the state of Florida) toward the cost of supervision, and a 4% surcharge.

Here’s where the order gets tricky. The order states that Casey “will not change [her] residence or employment or leave the county of [her] residence without first procuring the consent of [her] Probation Officer.” Oddly, her last place of residence was 4937 Hopespring Drive. Something tells me she will fight tooth and nail to keep herself away from that house.

The order carries a total of 13 legal stipulations she must follow, such as not being able to own any sort of weapon. Attached are the two documents released by the Clerk of Courts today. I think we can fully count on her defense challenging this new order, but what judge will hear the motion? None other than Chief Judge Belvin Perry, according to the Orlando Sentinel write-up.

I do not believe Judge Strickland intended to have the last laugh. His design was for Casey to serve her probation upon her release from jail. Isn’t it ironic, though, that in the end, while Cheney Mason claims he was able to take the judge down, he couldn’t take him out? Rich indeed!

OneTouch Aug 01, 2011 (1)

OneTouch Aug 01, 2011 (2)

Well Worth 10 Minutes of Your Time

Explanation for Casey's Sunday Release Date

This was e-mailed to me by Karen Levey, Chief of Due Process Services for the Orange County Courthouse. The county requested that she distribute it. This should explain why Casey will be released from jail on Sunday.

July 12, 2011

TO: Interested Media

FROM: Michael Tidwell, Chief, Orange County Corrections

RE: Release Date for Casey Marie Anthony

Inmate Casey Marie Anthony was found guilty of four (4) first degree misdemeanors on July 5, 2011. In anticipation of the announced sentencing on July 7, 2011, jail staff began to calculate possible outcomes in order to be responsive to the Court. One scenario that was evaluated was a sentence of four (4) consecutive one (1) year terms in the Orange County Jail.

Initial computations indicated, based on a sentence of four (4) one (1) year terms, inmate Anthony was eligible for 240 days of “statutory gain time”, awarded at the rate of 5 days per month for each of the 48 months. In addition, inmate Anthony was eligible for “constructive gain time”, as authorized by County Ordinance due to her Protective Custody status. Calculations yielded a projected release date of 8/25/11.

On July 7, 2011, Orange County Corrections advised the Court of the projected release date of 8/25/11. Shortly thereafter, the Court issued an order awarding Ms. Anthony to 1043 days time served.

In an effort to respond quickly to the Court, Corrections staff recomputed the projected release date. The amount of “statutory gain time” remained the same, but the amount of “constructive gain time” was reduced as the projected length of sentence was reduced. In the process of this rapid recalculation, inmate Anthony was inadvertently credited with “constructive gain time” for a complete month July‐August, rather than for a partial month.

This oversight resulted in the Court being advised that the projected release date was 7/13/11. As with all time served cases, staff conducted a routine secondary review of the sentence computation and discovered the oversight. Once the oversight was corrected, it was determined inmate Anthony had been erroneously awarded four (4) additional days due to the change in length of sentence. This changed the projected release date from 7/13/11 to 7/17/11. This change was immediately reported to the Court.

The Sad End of a Saga

“Once upon a time…” No, I can’t begin this story that way since it could never end with, “… and they lived happily ever after.”

Read on at

Orlando Magazine

Or

Click the image

Feel free to add your thoughts.

THANK YOU!

A Farewell to ‘Marinade’ Dave

I think the title says it best.

Orlando Magazine

Or

Click the image

Feel free to add your thoughts.

THANK YOU!

Q&A With Dave on Thursday

After Casey Anthony is sentenced on Thursday, “Marinade” Dave will be available for a one-on-one with you from 2-10 p.m. EDT.  Just post your questions or comments on the link below and Dave will get to them ASAP.

Orlando Magazine

Or

Click the image

Feel free to add your thoughts.

THANK YOU!

Dumbfounded, With Prejudice

When Cheney Mason joined Casey Anthony’s defense team in March of 2008, he proclaimed that the day would come when “we will walk out of here with Casey in arm.” He was that confident she would be acquitted. He was right.

Please tell me what you think on Orlando Magazine

Click the image

Feel free to add your thoughts.

THANK YOU!

Justice Didn’t Take a Holiday

 Sitting in court yesterday, I found it ironic and so apropos that the fate of Casey Anthony was delivered into the hands of a jury of her peers on Independence Day. For nearly three years she has been afforded the presumption of innocence while the murder case against her slowly inched through our legal system. She has had the luxury of being ensnared by a judicial system that seeks to ensure a defendant’s right to a fair trial.

Share your thoughts on Orlando Magazine

Click the image

Feel free to add your thoughts.

THANK YOU!